McNeil government tweaks controversial laws

The McNeil government remains under fire despite an attempt to mollify critics of two bills designed to replace two others that were ruled unconstitutional. 

That's because despite accepting amendments proposed by an opposition MLA on Bill 27, the Intimate Images and Cyber-Protection Act, the governing Liberals voted down change after change proposed by the NDP and PC's on that bill and Bill 16, the Adult Capacity and Decision-Making Act.

Intimate Images and Cyber-Protection Act

Bill 27 is designed to replace the Cyber-Safety Act that Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Glen McDougall called "a colossal failure" in his December 2015 ruling.

The lawyer who won that case, David Fraser, told CBC News last Friday the replacement law appeared weak.

"I'm afraid the pendulum has swung a little bit too far," he said.

The proposed law more narrowly defines cyberbullying. It also takes away the ability of CyberSCAN, the unit that enforced the previous law, to seek court orders compelling perpetrators to stop. Under the new law, it would be up to individual victims to seek recourse through the courts.

The minor concession offered to PC MLA Karla MacFarlane Wednesday was to include a clause to allow CyberSCAN to share information with police with the consent of a victim.

"At least there's a file started," she said during debate on the amendment, "and that way, the police will be able to provide that information to a judge later on if they decide to take it to court."

Adult Capacity and Decision-Making Act

The changes to Bill 16 were all brought forward by the government following criticism by legal experts, people who advocate on behalf of disabled people and Dave Kent, an intellectually disabled person who testified before the legislature's law amendments committee.

The changes include reviewing the act every three years instead of every five, and a clause making it clear those who are subject to the conditions imposed by the Incompetent Persons Act have the right to review that order under the new law.

Dalhousie University professor and legal expert Archie Kaiser dismissed that concession as inconsequential. He also suggested the new law might face a court challenge like the old law did.

"I do think there are problems with the constitutionality of the bill," he told reporters at Province House. "I do think there are fundamental weaknesses with it and that it may well conflict with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms." 

"Whether the battle continues in the Nova Scotia courts or the United Nations, it has to continue."

Both bills head to third and final reading Thursday, which is when the fall sitting is expected to wrap up.